Disposed

Rukhsar Bano v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Dec 2024A482/42839/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court directed the Family Court, Jaunpur to expedite disposal of a Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance case. Despite arguments invoking Apex Court restrictions, the Court ordered closure within three months with penalty for adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Family Court, Jaunpur to decide Section 125 case within three months, fixing three dates in a week, with Rs.500 cost per unnecessary adjournment.

Rukhsar Bano vs State of U.P. and Another — Maintenance and Alimony | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:198934

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42839 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rukhsar Bano Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anis Lata Srivastava,Arvind Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Anis Lata Srivastava, the learned counsel for applicants and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Applicant-Rukhsar Bano, who is a complainant, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for a direction to Principal Judge, Family Court, Jaunpur to decide Case No. 979 of 2020 (Rukhsar Bano Vs. Gulzar Ahmad @ Raju) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station-Sarpataha, District-Jaunpur within a time period fixed by this Court.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicant is legally wedded wife of opposite partyi-2, Gulzar Ahmad @ Raju. However, on account of negligence of opposite party-2, applicant was faced with despair and destitution. Consequently, she initiated proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance, which came to registered as Case No. 979 of 2020 (Rukhsar Bano Vs. Gulzar Ahmad @ Raju) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police StationSarpataha, District-Jaunpur. Initially, an order for interim maintenance was passed in favour of applicant on 01.11.2021. However, opposite party-2 filed an application under Section 126 (3) Cr.P.C seeking recall of the order dated 01.11.2021, which was

¶10

allowed by court below vide order dated 07.06.2024. However, since then no maintenance is being paid by opposite party-2 to applicant. Consequently, in view of above, applicant has now approached this Court by means of present application for a direction to court below to expedite the hearing of aforementioned complaint case.

¶11

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed the present application. Placing reliance upon paragraphs 41 and 42 of five Judges Bench judgement of Apex Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of U.P. and Others, 2024 SCC Online SC 207 , the learned A.G.A. submits that no direction for time bound disposal can be issued by this Court in view of the injunction issued by the Apex Court. As such, present application is liable to be dismissed by this Court.

¶12

In rejoinder, the learned counsel for applicant submits that Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a beneficent piece of legislation. The same has been incorporated to emancipate the destitution of a legally married women. The delay in payment of maintenance to a woman facing destitution defeats the very objective behind Section 125 Cr.P.c. In view of above, the direction as prayed for can be issued by this Court.

¶13

Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State- opposite party-1 and upon perusal of material brought on record, this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping this application pending.

¶14

Accordingly, present application is disposed of finally with a direction to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jaunpur to decide Case No. 979 of 2020 (Rukhsar Bano Vs. Gulzar Ahmad @ Raju) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., Police Station-Sarpataha, District-

¶15

Jaunpur with all expedition without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. In case the adjournment is inevitable, the same shall be granted on cost of Rs.500/- per date payable to the other party. The Court below in order to achieve the aforesaid objective shall fix three dates in a week and shall further endeavour to conclude the proceedings within a period of three months form the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶16

Order Date :- 19.12.2024 YK

¶17

Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rukhsar Bano v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rukhsar Bano v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd Ashraf Ali @ Bandar vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Priti vs State of Up Others

Sheeba Khan and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Taufik Shah vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Murari Lal Chaudhary Alias Murari Lal Verma vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh vs State of U.P. and Another